Clunker Remorse

Many auto buyers who rushed to take stolen loot CARS "rebate" money in order to purchase a new vehicle are now having second thoughts, and while I certainly don't have sympathy for such thieves, I can understand their regrets. A survey in late August revealed that over 17% of Cash For Clunkers buyers have doubts about being lured into taking on more debt. The normal buyer's remorse percentage for new car purchases is around 7 percent.

Since Americans are already burdened with too much debt, a government program designed to create more of it never made sense, but that's the logic behind Obama's entire spend-the-country-into-ruin economic "recovery" plan.



Charities that accept used car donations were hurt by the program, as were the poor, many of whom rely on the used car market for affordable transportation, while wealthier Americans were disproportionally helped, as having more money and actually being able to afford new car prices apparently caused many of the well-off to seek out free money stolen from less fortunate individuals through taxation, to help buy that new Lexus or Mercedes.

A recovering moron, who was as clueless about clunkers as he was about cops, made this comment regarding the fact that many people would actually drive more after trading in their old vehicle under the C4C program:

Why would they drive the new car more than the old car?

They hardly ever drive the old van.

They buy a new car to replace an old van they hardly ever drive.

They then drive more.

There must be a reason why they'd suddenly start driving more.

No?

Uh, yes, moron.

Quicker than you can say, “Holy statistics, Mr. Wizard,” the numbers nerds ascertained that the new vehicles sold under C4C will use more—not less—fuel than the beaters that were turned in and destroyed.

How can that be? Think of it on a personal level. Suppose you had a 10-year-old particulate belcher that, as the euphemism goes, needed work. Even if you lived in an Orlando suburb, you’d still be less than excited at the idea of piling the kids into it and lighting out for Disney World. But that new Malibu that gets a hell of a lot better mileage is a different kettle of green. You trust it; it’s economical; you drive it more. A lot more, according to another piece of research.

CNW surveyed drivers involved in the purchase of the first 239,000 C4C vehicles. The average intended annual mileage was 10,894, up from the actual clunker mileage of 6,162. For those of you without a calculator falling readily to hand, that’s nearly double.-source.

And I'm proven right once again, while the morons, as usual, are wrong.

The Last C4C Post

...Well, maybe it is the last, but then again, I could be lying, just like the politicians who gave us "Cash for Clunkers". It appears that a large number of those who traded in "clunkers" were quite well-to-do, the sort that didn't need a government hand-out in order to afford to buy a new car.

Nielsen tracked the online surfing of tens of thousands of survey participants and found that people who earned more than $100,000 were 33 percent more likely than Nielsen's average participants to go to cars.gov, the official clunkers Web site. Nielsen said people above $150,000 were 36 percent more likely to visit the site.-Clunker buyers had some cash

Just another government program sponsored by "liberals" that helped the wealthy and hurt the poor (by removing hundreds of thousands of inexpensive vehicles from the used car market).

More Clunker Crap

I hope this is the last post I make on the stupid CARS aka "Cash for Clunkers" stupidity.

I've heard from numerous individuals attempting to use the trade-in program state that many auto dealerships were selling their vehicles at MSRP (the ridiculously inflated sticker price) whenever someone wanted to use Cash for Clunkers. Basically all other rebates and discounts were out the window in those cases, even though this was supposed to be an incentive to car buyers and not a way for the dealerships to be the only beneficiaries of lining their pockets with tax money.

If the price would have been the same without the "Clunker" trade-in, what was the point? But this is what was happening, and it's not really surprising, as the fools in government never consider the consequences of meddling with the free market in the first place.

I was still also hearing of people trading in vehicles they never really used for new ones they would use. So one supposed reason for the program (to get those gas guzzlers off the road) was also baloney. I spoke to a woman who told me she would have to get a jump start or probably a new battery to get her old car over to the dealership, a car that was indeed registered and insured but that had just been sitting for months without being driven.

The unconscionable wastefulness of the program was also indicated time and time again, as with a gentleman who told me his early 90s van was in very good condition and how he hated to get rid of it, but just couldn't pass up the opportunity to get $4500 on it as a trade-in on a new car.

If the program was such a success, as our overlords keep telling us, why have they ended it? Maybe it didn't really make sense after all? Nah, couldn't be.

Goodbye Clunkermania

So those brilliant masterminds behind the Cash for "Clunkers" spending frenzy have finally thrown in the towel. None of it made any sense, economically or otherwise, but the program was nevertheless given another 2 billion dollars to throw down a rat hole after the first billion was exhausted so quickly (hey, a billion here and a billion there, and pretty soon we're talking real money, right?).

The cars turned in under the program had to be turned in for scrap, which means it was unlikely any newer vehicle worth more than the maximum $4500 offered for the trade-ins would have inspired any Hummer owners to permanently take their gas guzzlers off the road. So we see instead scenarios like the following (from a gentleman I spoke to): A couple owns a 1986 Ford Van and decides to trade it for a new Toyota. But the guy admits that even though they use the van they hardly ever drive it. "Only once in a while, so we really don't get much use out of it" he confessed. So now the van, which is supposed to be environmentally harmful and fuel inefficient, gets replaced by a new vehicle that will be driven, most likely, daily, and therefore actually end up using more fuel than the old van that just sat there most of the time, harming nobody.

Was there any economic stimulus? Well, of course. When you give money away, people are going to take it. I am disappointed and disheartened, however, by the enthusiasm of ordinary people for getting their share of the stolen loot. I wonder how many of those who took advantage (there's a perfect word to describe it) of it were tea-partying type Republicans. Did their "principles" hold up under the temptation of big daddy government hand-outs? I don't know why anyone would expect that, considering the hypocrisy of "conservatives" during the years of the baby Bush presidency.

Also sickening were the auto companies and their dealers. They lobbied hard for the CARS program and its extension, then advertised it like there was no tomorrow. This is why so many are disgusted with the poor, downtrodden businessman. It's because he is not now and never has been in favor of free markets.

The car dealers are complaining that they have lots full of "clunkers" that the government hasn't paid them for yet. I wouldn't care if they never got "their" stolen cash. It would serve them right, first for campaigning to take more tax dollars and then as payback for the decades of underhanded, dishonest, snake oil sales techniques that cheated untold millions of consumers out of their hard earned wages. The auto company bailout of GM and Chrysler, and now the Cash for Clunkers fiasco, is simply the auto industry up to its old tricks.

Gary North On the Evil "Cash for Clunkers" Boondoggle

Hit-and-Run: How the Government's Billion-Dollar Cash for Clunkers Boondoggle Hurts the Poor

Blog of the Moment: Lola's Diner

Maybe I'm just in a bad mood because of the anger I feel every time I think of the lunatics who are running the USA asylum, but this "Cash for Clunkers" crap makes me particularly mad each time I think of it. It's wasteful, it's stupid, and most of all it's criminal (more stolen money going to the well-off and the auto companies -I don't know about you, but I can't afford a new car right now, and I know of not a few who want to trade-in "clunkers" to buy a brand new Lexus or Mercedes) and evil (it's evil and cruel to deny the poor transportation, and poor people buy those used cars that are now being junked by the hundreds of thousands).

Anyway, this post sealed the deal for Lola's Diner, and it is now Blog of the Moment.

The biggest thing that strikes me about this whole program is what a waste. What a waste of some perfectly good, running cars. And in some cases some even perfectly good looking, good running cars.

And if this isn't the biggest joke, my 2006 Honda Pilot 4WD qualifies. Why in the hell would I trade in and have shredded a perfectly good looking and running, like new, 2006 vehicle? That's insane! I love my Pilot! Even though I was seriously suffering through the gas prices last summer, I never considered parting with it. It does what I need, gets me where I need to go comfortably and stylishly. And...it's paid for. I could never even consider taking on a car loan at this point in time. I am sure I'm not alone.

I find it absolutely amazing that so many people have taken advantage of this program, considering the economy and the recent difficulties in obtaining credit. How can anyone consider taking on a car loan when they aren't sure they're not going to be part of their employer's next lay-off? Couldn't the government find a better way to stimulate the economy? And why is it that the automobile industry is benefiting yet again? What other things does the government have up it's sleeve to benefit the automobile industry?

Read the rest at Lola's Diner


I had a conversation with a woman who is still happy with her 1993 Ford Taurus, but her grown, busybody children encouraged her to join the thievery and buy a new vehicle using the clunkers rebate. As she explained to me "It gets me where I need to go just fine". Still, because her kids were persistent, she was going to go look at some new cars.

In this corrupt society today, if you are sane and dare to question the insanity around you, you're labeled insane, while the truly insane who promote and encourage the craziness are "normal" and "mainstream". Sick!